well i'm john berman in washington d.c. and here's what's coming up tonight on the big picture adam lanza jared loftier james holmes these are the names of the men who have committed some of the deadliest mass shootings in recent american history but putting aside weak gun control laws the gun lobby and gun manufacturers under ronald reagan really helped these men to pull the trigger and take so many american lives also is the american government have the right to kill potentially dangerous american citizens without the due process requirements of the constitution that and more and it's big picture politics and.

you need to know this ronald reagan helped kill those twenty first graders in newtown connecticut and in the roughly two months since then he's helped kill more than fifteen hundred others who died by guns in the united states two of those gun deaths happened in boynton beach florida over the weekend forty five year old is such a seed rosa vall went to the home of his wife and two children on saturday armed with a pistol and a semiautomatic tec nine last year his wife had filed for divorce so cedar zero armed with two handguns decided to kill her two kids and their two kids right in front of her he told her he was going to kill or that he was going to. that he wanted her to stay alive and suffer through watching her two kids killed in front of or even strangled one of his sons to death and turned his gun on his other son shooting him dead and then shot himself with his gun leaving his wife to deal with

the carnage two more dead by way of the gun three killed by reagan. and then there's what happened in texas on monday or misplaced dog led to the deaths of two more americans by guns seventy five year old dallas man accuses neighbors of dumping dog poop on his patio and since he had a gun on any sighted to use it walked out of his to his patio looked up saw one of his neighbors standing on the patio above him and shot her dead and then walked up the stairs into the apartment and shot her boyfriend dead two the couple had four kids luckily three were away for from the home at the time of the shooting and the infant in the apartment was either ignored or missed these four kids are now going to be growing up without parents in part because of ronald reagan right now congress is considering gun control legislation there's no question more background checks will lead to fewer weapons in the hands of criminals and fewer gun deaths there's also no question that a ban on high capacity magazines could save lives in future mass shootings but one

thing no one's talking about when it comes to gun violence in america is ronald reagan the man who brought us thirty two years of reaganomics and thus soaring inequality across our nation. today wealth inequality in america is higher than it's ever been it's even higher than in any other developed country in the world nearly the opposite of the way things were when ronald reagan became president it was reaganomics ronald reagan's tax cuts for the rich is unique in union busting is ending free college education is ending enforcement of the sherman antitrust act is slashing the social safety net that has devastated the working and middle class americans who once lived the american dream are now living in desperation paycheck to paycheck deep in second mortgage credit card and student loan debt and one illness or job was away from complete financial ruin the bills pile up domestic

disturbances increase in drug addiction and violence become natural responses to this inequality and since there are three hundred million guns in america that's the easily grab weapon for when americans respond to this inequality and it's psychological pain with violence. this is no theory researchers kate picketed richard wilson at the equality trust in the u.k. have done the research on this issue and they found conclusively that the more of an equal a society is the more social ills it has from bile and to drug abuse to mental illness to dozens of other problems here's what they found violence in particular the bottom axis plots income inequality going from low levels of inequality to high levels of inequality the side axis plots homicides per million people see where the united states is it's an outlier way at the top when it comes to violence and also one of the most unequal nations in the world thanks to thirty three years of

reaganomics singapore is the only other nation studied that had a higher inequality than the united states. but it doesn't have near as many homicides which might have something to do with the fact that it's a stream only difficult to own a gun in singapore in singapore you have to obtain a license and provide justification for why you need a gun like target shooting yourself defense if you choose target shooting at the shoot your gun at an approved firing range if you do get a gun it will be a small one is pistols over thirty two caliber and all automatic weapons are outlawed so the strict gun control might explain singapore's lack of homicides despite huge inequality rates but here in america we have no such gun control but we do have wealth inequality that rivals the roman empire again because of ronald reagan and that's part of what's fueling this violence which is why any gun control legislation short of virtually banning most guns and singapore is done will do little to really confront this orgy of gun violence in america only when we address

the real force behind any quality and the violence it produces ronald reagan and thirty two years of reaganomics can we do something about the thousands who die every year by way of the gun in america. ronald reagan and those who carried these middle class destroying vision forward are the real trigger behind all of these murders yes an assault weapons of mass ban would do something to cut back the firepower associated with american violence or rolling back the reagan tax cuts and thus bringing back the american middle class we do a lot more. now it's turned over to meit's politics panel joining me are cameron stewart research director associated with government studies at the heritage foundation karl frisch democratic strategist and partner bullfight strategies and vince colony's senior online editor at the daily caller so let me start when i ask you all the reaganites on the panel if we have any here. are you happy with what thirty years of reaganomics has done to this country so well you know i want to.

welcome to the program oh thank you for having me on i would say this goes this goes well beyond quote unquote reaganomics from from years in years past i actually was it was a wheel when reagan was around so i don't really remember but i've read about what it was like back then and you know you mentioned the key here and the stories that you read before this segment were you know the pivotal factor is mental health but isn't what you find is that if there's also the equality trust has a as a chart of mental health on a vertical axis inequality on a horizontal access you look at the highly equal countries japan norway sweden finland denmark they all have diagnosable mental health problem and by the way that they now actually have an international standard for this so they actually go below five percent we are the most on equal we're at thirty three percent and and there's

a if you plot the scatter graph and there's an absolute line between rising inequality and rising mental health problems people have anxiety as they know that life is on fact here it is. this is a no this is but there's a very similar scatter graph for mental health so well you know mental health comes out of income inequality which kind of reaganomics i don't think you can necessarily say if you are poor and you live around a bunch of wealthy people that you are going to be a mentally ill and b. what he's saying well and you know and take that in and go you know shoot up your family now i notice in some way the mentally ill your mental illness goes well beyond strict economic know but i think i think it's perfectly common sense to know that when you don't deal with. income that is that in equal when you don't deal well with your poor when every political discussion is about helping the super wealthy as opposed to helping the least among us that we're probably not solving

our mental health issues either or our health issues in general so the idea that you would have people who are diagnosed or are diagnosed as mentally ill in this country at a higher percentage than others is not completely out of balance like now. not only that the saying in response to gun violence that it's a mental illness problem is that's the you know the n.r.a. has wavered talking that it's very bad the matter is not only people are far more likely to be victims of violence than perpetrators of violence proportion to the rest of the population they're more likely to be victims you know it's time to i'm surprised cameron did say that he's for marriage and i would think this is one thing that i would stress one your argument i think is this is a sad one to start off saying that reagan caused the deaths of these families reaganomics to. very clearly said in your segment that ronald reagan created this environment and killed these families where it was was a part of this and first of all that's just very base political debate it does it's actually no place i think even in this panel you should hear what they have left in

a rush limbaugh let me let me but let me go on but let me go on to you mentioned like in pop poverty and how gun violence affects areas of poverty that is a real problem in this country you can look at chicago right now and see the incredible amount of gun violence that's happening at the hands of people who are. simple handguns not assault weapons not the types of things that this debate is raging on. and you can also see. any quality often some of it legally obtained and there are solutions to that problem that chicago doesn't necessarily have the stomach for we'll see if they can put more police in these areas that a lot of realistic proponents of stop and frisk done in a in a way that's. no new money to their lives by the way one of the things that i think both sides are coming at the gun issue from a very interesting perspective which is the right is usually only talking about mental illness or hollywood and the left is usually only talking about banning certain types of weapons. all of those things probably play some role in the

discussion here but what it ends up missing is the broad middle where if we know that many of the guns a preponderance of the guns used in to kill people when not in defense of your own home which is also a big problem people into shooting members of their own family are obtained illegally so what do we do to take the legal guns off the market while on my side of the aisle we talk a lot about we're going to ban certain guns and through attrition eventually less of those guns will end up in the hands of of people who might use them for harm the problem with that is is that it doesn't go far enough and it does basically says we're going to wait and what we should be doing is we should be registering guns in this country we should be licensing guns in this country we should be making people come back and show that they are competent to own those guns in this country and if the worry of the right which is that the government's going to come and take your guns away they can have this massive database and they're going to use it to pluck your guns away which is a not a second is a common refrain on rush limbaugh i have some scary news for my conservative

friends the people with the largest database of go towards in this country is the national rifle association and for just nine cents a name you can get the name address and phone number of every one of their membership there's a very simple thing they'll talk about and i respect that ideological side of the argument. talking about though is obviously creating these laws and designating what weapons are illegal to have and cetera et cetera two basic points one that's been repeated a lot of times is criminals don't follow laws that's fine believe that they're but they also are there for which the other side of the coin i would be willing to listen to went out and bought a handgun tomorrow it was stolen three weeks from now i would rather find out three weeks from now that it was stolen than two years from now when it's coming out of the home here's the other side of the so if if right now the federal government has . many federal background checks federal gun background checks in january at their second highest rate after december was the record month january is that because it was anyone going at a gun store a lot of micro what what we know though is that they can't actually keep up with whether or not these background checks are falsified they can't even the vice president admitted it in other states and we are right we've watered away from the

original topic you know it's about and for once upon a law on the book and then other of tonight's big picture politics panel ready to spring. no longer represents the. people who are going to take the term. the way or.

the worse for the. white house for the. never seen anything like.

why go back to tonight's big picture politics panel joining me are cameron's sword karl frisch and vince colonise let's get back to it n.b.c. news has obtained an official white house memo which lays out the legal justification behind using drones legal justification as the justification couched in legal language maybe not a legal justification than using drones for the targeted. killing of american citizens abroad three americans have been killed so far via a drone strike under the obama administration quoting anwar al our locky his son and samir khan according to the document president obama and other high level administration officials an order the killing of an american overseas if the individual is an imminent threat is incapable of being captured and the operation is compatible with the rules of war so what's an imminent threat that i can provide

an overly broad definition arguing that even if the individual is not actively engaged in an imminent attack against america he or she can still be considered an imminent threat if they have in the past plotted to attack americans or remain a member of a hostile organization. he shamsi shamsi the director of the a.c.l.u. is national security projects at the white house as justification for targeted killings summarizes in cold legal terms a stunning overreach of executive authority the claimed power to declare americans a threat and kill them far from a recognized battlefield and without any judicial involvement before or after the fact hard to believe this was produced in a damaged in a democracy built on a system of checks and balances so my question is very simple i actually have a couple of questions about this number one where where is where is due process and number two when is the blowback going to come back we know now that you know the

reason bin laden put together nine eleven is because we built that air force base for the first gulf war in saudi arabia he was yelling about that back in ninety eight you know when are we going to see blowback from this karl your thoughts we see blue back from this whenever our troops are harmed or hurt i think that they're i wouldn't lay all the blame. for it on that but i think that it's at least in part but the other thing i would say is we have to have an honest discussion about these issues and we we just don't have those in a lot of the media. we had back to back presidential elections in two thousand and eight we had dozens of candidates both right and left republican and democratic two thousand and twelve we had a good dozen on the republican side not once in the presidential primary debates in a way or two thousand and twelve or in the general election debates of our way or two thousand and twelve did any questions come up about executive power and then we're shocked when these kinds of documents come out i would i would caution the audience that according to the reports i've read that's not the final version but

if that's just a teaser i don't think i'm going to be too pleased if we do get the final documents have been requested by various members of the media. but i'm probably like a lot of americans out there i think when i think of drone i think of something that's keeping our troops out of harm as it goes about trying to kill the evil doers. but because we don't have these discussions in the media very few americans are probably aware that thousands upon thousands of innocent people are killed with these drone attacks or the news that we're seeing here that the administration thinks that it's perfectly acceptable and then also to also say that this has to be because without any kind of due process of law this has to be good since one of the rules of law of war and yet we're doing this since inside countries with whom we are not at war in fact they're allied countries of ours and there is absolutely no due process involved it seems to me like this is violating at least two major parts of the consulate well i allers act in the end the fourth amendment i'm not i'm not as concerned about like the optics and the side where our enemies feel like they're

having the rights of seven from the right there whatever whatever perceived rights they may think that they have in french what i do have an issue with and i think what what as come out especially among civil libertarians and liberals who have constantly been against these types of national security presidents are that the fifth amendment is very clear about what the what american citizens are afforded and that is due process now you know even in a domestic engine incident where somebody is imminently a threat to other people obviously cops can engage them and sometimes kill them whether or not they engage in due process but i think the most troubling thing that comes out of this memo is an indication that regardless whether or not they do pose an imminent threat of any nature that these drone strikes violate what is what our fifth amendment rights like it or not the fifth amendment does exist and it needs to be recognized in the case of american citizens even even if they're abroad let's talk about drilling gas prices too is very interesting we conservatives and liberals. are all concerned about this where you when you when they go about it when they know about it that's the thing we need more conversation on any of the gas prices two issues it's been

a drilling boom in america with oil production within the united states increasing thirteen point eight percent last year but a new report by the information energy or the energy and information ministry shows that household spending on gasoline is at a thirty year i gasoline prices have increased dramatically over the last two years . about spending about four percent of the total incomes on gas about three grand a year meanwhile while oil production surges and gas prices climb trans national oil corporations are rolling cash exxon mobil the most profitable country in the history of the world reported profits of forty five billion dollars last year in the top four oil companies reported total profits in aggregate of over one hundred billion next year the u.s. is a net exporter of petroleum products in fact last year petroleum products were our number one export first time since one thousand nine hundred sixty two so isn't this a newsflash for the drill baby drill crowd that more drilling doesn't mean lower

gas prices in fact cameron what it means is we get the crap from from the pollution from the from the distilling we get to pay for protecting the oil lanes to saudi arabia but the oil gets shipped out of texas to england and to china and to mexico and to brazil you know you were talking about all the money that exxon mobil is making why not bring some of that money here and that's what drilling to us when you open up drilling you open up land for exploration both on shore and offshore that you know although although i want to show how much do we make off a barrel of a barrel all the holes on although the domestic oil production of oil is a natural is a internationally traded commodity right so what we produce here is not going to have a really super large effect on the international trade in oil that has great to hear conservative media will be they would never say i don't want to have you know all the bible without gas prices no outside outside of the news forces of the of the

international market a bear a lot of weight now it does only last night i said well a little bass pro no wait wait wait and wait a minute this is production here but will comes with increased production here in greece to exploration all that our jobs are economic if movie second if you can are number one export was not. refined oil products the price of gas the drop by a gallon a dollar a gallon at least so let's keep increasing the production here you get into the middle of let's put an export tariff on refined oil products curl i am shocked that we're having a debate in which conservatives are talking about world markets affecting the guts of price after spending four years talking about how obama is this possible for you to increase domestic production which would we are we just don't want to hear all that we're exporting you're producing more oil and crude products and we excrete it for what the private sector does that's not on federal lands that's his favorite thing to do ok and i would do is that you know watch the debates knows that everyone who's seen what's going on in north dakota knows that everyone has seen

what's going on in southwest and western pennsylvania as well and this is the whole thing that they were talking about during the debates was what or whether or not obama had approved certain licenses or whether or not the administration just let them lapse and get reinstitute or was or was in the minds of fox news refusing to even the issue that was here so here's was here's a here's another point i want to refer back to the numbers that you mentioned you said that gasoline prices are at their highest share as a percentage of household income now than they've ever been and a lot of that also has to do with the fact that household incomes have actually dropped since obama took office by eight percent i mean so since at it since the last year the bush administration but we're talking about the great bush was so i understand that bush is a component to this but under but also recognize this during the campaign the d.n.c. very clearly and the president very clearly said look we own this economy now no more talking about bush and they said they were asked on this thing so we're not part of the i'm just going to blame bush so recognize you're lucky you're not part of them and so recognize that an eight percent drop in median household income

plays a huge role in the fact that gas prices are taking a higher share of what we're paying out in our checkbooks we just need to give more money to corporate america because of the poor will do better i would i'm wondering why we don't create the equivalent to last a permanent fund you know everybody will ask is two thousand dollars a year just for living there because they had the good sense to say this oil. under our ground we're going to actually charge a few bucks for this stuff you know the oil companies there still may can do that if the president would let us and by the way i don't want a lot of actually i don't know yes i do know one of the things that has been discussed is you know the president in the democrats in congress took a lot of heat for you know tax credits for eco friendly cars raising gas emission prices imagine how much worse off would be had that not been the case some of the stories that i've written about this issue have noted that you know the cost to the average family is about the same as the payroll tax deduction but with the increase it without the increase of people driving fuel efficient more fuel efficient vehicles this crunch would be even more difficult to somebody are going to descending into into what is there i want to move into for the start of free

internet for everybody the f.c.c. is considering plans to set up three high speed public wi-fi in both major metropolitan areas and rural areas currently the united states ranks sixteenth in the world in access to high speed internet caution and speed microsoft and google are two major propellants of the plan meanwhile the telecom giants want the wireless spectrum completely privatized are horrified by the idea of free public access to high speed internet isn't the internet just the next generation of the commons that should be owned by all of us and available for free at a minimal price like police firefighters water facilities or perhaps more appropriately the public library isn't this isn't the internet this generation's version of the like that i don't for one i'm kind of surprised that your super excited about the government having regulation control over information flow i mean that's you do you do realize that what comes with the government owning this property comes from the regulations that would follow oracle is

a lot more accountable than corporate america why i don't know your government is all you know most of most all of your internet stuff is passing through government pipelines anyway or pipelines that are you excited by the prospect of censorship that was cited and it brought everyone i mean i guess what i'm excited about if you go throughout the u.k. not only. can you get a cell phone with the same kind of data package you pay one hundred fifty dollars a month for here in the united states for a fraction of the cost and choose from dozens of twenty two dollars a month in france with unlimited data and choose for and faster uplink it down like estimates and choose from dozens of different companies in the u.s. you've got a few that you can to choose from i would love to see the kind of competition that you're seeing in the u.k. when it comes to internet can i would love to see the government force corporations to be competitive i just want to make two points here number one of course google's excited about this because they will put although providing it for free they're going to put advertisements all over it make more money right so you know this

first of all the whole question here is who is going to build these free networks the f.c.c. going to only interested in isolation if you do who don't want a lot where i am not making i was also not different than having public libraries. i would argue the better route for this is to go what we've been talking about for months here in the in the public forum here is to auction this off although this privatized to private to privatized ok private time then if you're worried about us if you're worried about you know senator joe lieberman now you've got one right among others it now you have private corporations who can make decisions about what we see and don't see and they are not accountable they want that oh absolutely they spent and you have are going to get it and the government won't and if the companies don't think we don't like we can we can vote the bums out of office you can't vote. for us and you know we got we have to wrap it up in cameron for carl you're blocking the monopoly real competition. thank you all for being with us tonight we'll be right back.

at least.

welcome back to the big picture i'm tom hartman coming up in this half hour the u.s. justice department plans to file suit against an and poor's for its role in the financial crisis the brought the american economy to its needs is this really about punishing the banks toure's who caused one of the worst recessions in history and do you want a drone using thermal imaging to keep track of you inside your own house like it or not this could become a reality of life in the united states i'll tell you how we fight back against this invasion of our privacy in tonight's deal we take.

in the best of the rest of the news banks alone didn't crash our economy a few years ago in fact some of the biggest fraudsters in the run up to the financial crisis in two thousand and seven and two thousand and eight for the credit rating agencies like s. and p. and moody's they gave prime ratings to junk mortgages it's been alleged that many of these ratings agencies actually took kickbacks from the banks to supply favorable ratings which ended up growing investors now the wall street journal is reporting that the u.s. justice department will file suit against s. and p. for its role in the crisis as imperious spotted by saying a d.o.j. lawsuit would be quote entirely without factual or legal merit you might remember it was s. and p. that downgraded the united states credit rating after the dema debt limit fiasco back in two thousand and eleven so this might be less about actually hold the wall

street suits accountable and more about revenge for embarrassing our nation. or did president obama get the message of the last election which is that the american people are sick of the crimes on wall street and actually want to see some three suits thrown in prison let's ask richard as scout he joins me now from los angeles respond. welcome white good to be here as always first of all richard the theory that this might be payback to s. and p. seems to me a little. inconsistent with reality in that when s. and p. downgraded our financial ratings they specifically blamed the republicans in congress so why would the obama white house want to go after them as revenge well it's also quite a bit later you know i mean i think that the payback theory didn't i some of the outrageous or ignores some of the outrageous evidence of misbehavior on the part not just the standard and poor's but the other rating agencies as well so if it's

payback it's kind of slow reacting payback and i i don't i don't worry about that and i don't you think it might even be that the payback theory which i'm seeing promoted more on the right wing sites on the left wing sites is just basically a fancy way of saying of helping create an amnesia about the fact that s. and p. originally blamed the basically the republicans in congress for the downgrade. well and i think that that's part of it and i also think that as simply as been part of the washington group that's been pushing austerity economics and despite the evidence they they continue to argue that if the u.s. doesn't get its debt limit even lower than it has been that they're going to downgrade the u.s. so in essence taking standard and poor's off the playing field we can see conservative argument for cutting government even more so i think there's a real political motivation to political motivations on their part to do that and

one of them is to keep pushing deficit economics so simply unique among the credit regency rating agencies in being. what would you call a deficit hawks or austerity pushers or whatever no i don't think they're unique but they're the most visible they have what they call a sovereign unit that looks at the credit ratings of governments and the head of that unit has been acting like a stopper in for quite some time issuing dictates the u.s. government and other governments about how the people should manage their own budget so i think they've been very visible in this regard i mean i think that but the other thing to remember and particularly with the payback theory is you know i'm one of the few people who did the analysis on this but when they downgraded the u.s. back in two thousand and eleven the stock market didn't care at all there was no penalty for the united states government in that downgrade so i think that is you know they're not unique but there are two things different about them one is that

they're very visible in talking about deficits and the government but number two is that thanks to the eleven subcommittee as senator carl levin in congress there's a great deal of documentation of the internal conversations and power points and memos and that and group phone calls showing that standard and poor's was absolutely driven by trying to please banks and bankers and not by you know i have right here. they did an internal poll of standard and poor analysts what did they see as their job and they listed four things and getting the data right was number four out of four of the first three were sales oriented so i think there's a uniquely rich vein of data on the nature of the misbehavior and corruption at standard and poor's that makes them the logical for its target richard can you recap for viewers what the you know what that what these crimes

were or is the alleged crimes in a way exactly what you know what why the what's the problem. well basically these credit agencies so called they we call them credit rates and rating agencies their private corporations are in the case of standard imports so mcgraw hill which is publicly traded there for profit companies that that get certification from the government and in order to credit to rate certain risks in certain investments and so on which is a very valuable thing to get from the government and that written into law in many cases that for example that certain investments have to be aaa investors like pension funds in a working people's retirement depend on their ratings but they're paid by the banks that they're rating which is just an inbuilt conflict of interest that's outrageous so the issue here is that standard standard and poor's was going around telling the

government and telling the public and investors that it was doing all these wonderful things to monitor mortgage backed securities and other types of investments when in reality as it turns out the average rating was issued with only fifteen minutes of analytical work on each one of them and meanwhile there were memo upon memo being dragged out. showing that they were changing these ratings because a banker complained for example the client is really on happy he wants you to take a look again and see if you can do something about that so i think the issue here fundamentally is fraud and the nature of the fraud is misrepresenting to the public and to the government that their own it's of their work on the honesty and of objectivity of their work that's the heart of this lawsuit and i think it's a very very strong one right now the rating agencies are not you know alone or unique in playing a role in the crash of the american economy do you think that this is the the

kickoff is this the beginning of the obama administration finally doing something about the banks toure's. well you know look it's a pleasant surprise i've been beating up on the justice department and the f.c.c. as much as anybody and it's pleasant to see them file a lawsuit that means something you know we'll see because if they win this lawsuit or if they settle it you know the frustrating thing with the obama administration in the big banks has been that the banks have settled hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars worth of outrageous fraud lawsuits then committed the same crimes again then settled again without any criminal indictments or prosecutions now this lawsuit although it's civil it's it's a suit and not an indictment name certain executives you know executive see an executive d.a. and so on who made certain statements that are arguably fraudulent so we'll see where this goes and we'll see if they follow up i'm not ready to say they've had a change of heart yet and they're certainly you know we still don't have an answer

from the justice department about outgoing assistant attorney general lanny breuer saying he wasn't going to indict banks that might pose a systemic risk so i don't know if there's been a change of heart but look you know it's a little glimpse of sunshine in a in a rainy pattern from the justice department and the government so let's see what happened absolutely and well see richard asco thanks so much for being with us tonight you back baxter to see. it's the good the bad of the very very promise sensuously ugly good. brendon ayanbadejo i said there occurred. i am but a oh a linebacker on the super bowl winning baltimore ravens sorry i'm not that much of a sportsman promise that if he won the super bowl he would use the fame that came

with it to speak out for l g b t equality monday he did just that take a look. everyone's been talking to gay people our entire lives whether we know it or not but we really believe that you're born gay and if i've had plenty of conversations with people that are gay and they say they're born gay no different than me been born in this beautiful home and coconut color that i people are born gay so why treat them any differently it's time that we treat everybody fairly and not only are we trying to dictate who people should love we're also trying to dictate who people should be if a woman wants to wear a man's clothes or for a man where it wants to wear women's clothes or you feel like you're a woman on the inside and you're really a man who cares let's just treat everybody equally let's move on let's evolve as a culture as a people well done but i couldn't have said it better myself the bad jamie diamond c.e.o. of wall street big bank j.p. morgan chase said in a speech in miami yesterday that the united states lacks the will to enact the

stupid austerity economic policies that have devastated much of europe diamond said quote but also europe as they have the will of their politicians their politicians say there is no plan b. the euro lobby dissolved away is very complicated it will take many years the united states is the opposite we know exactly the way it's something called simpson bowles in a lot of different plans come out we don't yet have the will you know it's a far simpler problem. little thanks to austerity europe is in shambles republicans in congress forced the government to make huge budget cuts that are already wreaking havoc on our economy and. time for the american people and the europeans for that matter to say no to austerity so that we don't become the next greece and a very very ugly. day saudi clinic cleric excuse me told an islamic television station the baby girl should be veiled to

avoid sexual harassment i would said the girl should wear the veil from the age of . two he went on to say that if a girl is sexually desired her parents should cover her face and force her to wear a veil to protect her from sexual deviance as you can imagine the comments have sparked outrage in saudi arabia and across the globe some of dowd's fellow saudi cleric clerics and publicly denounced the comments as well the fact is daoud would rather cover up a little baby girls than throw the sexual deviants who would go after them in jail and that is really really. after the break pretty soon drones will be swarming the skies all across america as they become the norm in investigating crimes and conducting surveillance but how can we draw a line on drones and keep them from invading our privacy by snooping on us here at home in tonight's debate.

let me let me i want to let me ask you a question from. here on this network is what we're having the debate we have our name sounds. familiar to you is this right to spank state never get here in a situation where the united way to talk about the surveillance with.

wealthy british. markets why not. find out what's really happening to the global economy with mike stronger for a no holds barred look at the global financial headlines tune into kinds of reports . and welcome back euro two more stories worth keeping an eye on first at the beginning is tonight's show we talk about gun violence what's causing over the next

few my. congress is going to look into a number of new policies universal background checks to limits on ammunition clips to assault weapons ban to try to slow down some of the bloodshed in america as i mentioned earlier addressing wealth inequality really should be on the table as well but no matter how modest the gun control proposals in congress will be the n.r.a. has made it clear that they will completely oppose any and everything that has to do with regulating guns if the word gun is even in the legislation the n.r.a. is against it and the n.r.a. hopes that it can keep up its heavyweight image here in washington d.c. and intimidate lawmakers into opposing any new gun control laws but the new reality is the n.r.a. isn't a heavyweight just look at how successful the n.r.a. was in the last election of all the millions of dollars the n.r.a. invested in politicians last november only point eight percent of it less than one

percent went to winning candidates that's not actually exactly a winning percentage that should be feared in fact a new poll from public policy polling shows that an endorsement from the n.r.a. may be a kiss of death the survey asked voters across the nation whether an endorsement from the n.a.r. an m.r.a. would make them more likely to support a candidate or less likely twenty six percent of voters said an n.r.a. endorsement makes them more likely to support a candidate but a whopping thirty nine percent compared to that twenty six thirty nine percent said it would make them less likely to support a candidate and among independent voters forty one percent said they'd be less likely to support a candidate backed by the n.r.a. . this is an organization that's jumped the shark only eight percent of our nation agrees with the n.r.a. position in opposing universal background checks it's their solution to sandy hook

more guns in schools and when pressure was put on the organization to support gun controls the n.r.a. went after the president's kids in a political advertisement and if you go to the n.r.a. his website you find an enemy's list with over five hundred names on it there's nothing intimidating about the n.r.a. anymore it's a desperate organization that's losing its grip on reality so members of congress it's your choice you can do what the n.r.a. wants you to do and you can get their endorsement but you could do so at your own political risk. and then there's this story coming out of washington d.c. where teen pregnancy rates are actually plummeting the city's health commissioner told the new york daily news that over the last decade teen pregnancy rates have dropped by twenty seven percent this drop likely has something to do with new york being one of only twenty one states that allows minors access to contraceptive

services also the public school system started a program two years ago to provide students in districts with high pregnancy rates with access to plan b. the morning after pill and the majority of parents in the new york city public school system approve of this expanded access to emergency contraceptives in other words rather than relying on abstinence education which causes higher teen pregnancy rates in republican southern states new york is confronting real world problems with real world solutions actual science that's good pals. crazy alert hair applaud love entering and tang once money america's favorite media clown donald trump is suing comedian and political pundit bill maher for failing to

come through on a promise well sort of a props last month maher went on jay leno show and made an interesting comparison between trump and another member of the animal kingdom to take over. we did a new rule one week that. suppose that perhaps donald trump had been the spawn of his mother having sex with boys. well i didn't just make this up the color of his hair. color i'm going to orange you're going to tell you it's the only two things in nature of the same color i'm willing to offer five dollars. that you can go to a charity of his charity or. send his birth certificate to maher to prove that he was not the offspring about every day but according to the donald maher is refusing to

pay up trump was on fox and friends this morning and told the talking heads that quote well i provided information he didn't play so today i sued bill maher for five million dollars for a charity for someone who supposedly shrewd when it comes to business needs to brush up on his law a bit more only said he would consider doling out the money to certainly didn't sign any or agreed to any kind of contract so while trump filed yet another frivolous lawsuit america's already overtaxed and abused legal system we're left to wonder could the donald really be the missing link between man and ape. imagine you're being stalked from the sky every time you go in or out of a building it's recording everybody you talk with every place you drive or take

public transportation your sky stalker can see through your windows read your lips could even use an infrared camera and see if you've lit a cigarette or what type of cigarette it is shouldn't this be illegal. when a celebrity gets a stalker they get a restraining order but if their structure was the police using a drone right now there are virtually no laws or regulations that would would or could protect them or that could protect you being concerned about such things is genuinely all american you could say that our privacy concerns started with george orwell who ironically was british with the publication of his book in one thousand nine hundred four but in reality the modern day american concern about governments snooping into our lives goes back before the american revolution when thomas jefferson lived in paris he communicated in code with his protege james madison

about their federalist political enemies jefferson did it again when he became president nineteen zero one developing an even more elaborate code to communicate with his most trusted aide merryweather lewis out of fear that military officers in the american army were reading president jefferson's mail and that the military officers were thinking of pulling a military coup to overthrow his administration the result was the jefferson lewis is suggestion fired two thirds of all the commissioned officers and cut the size of the army by about eighty percent. fast forward to today. police helicopters police trucks they can use infrared to see inside your house and g.p.s. units cops can attach to your car in every case there's a legitimate police use for these technologies as well as an incredible potential for abuse the fourth amendment part of the bill of rights that jefferson demanded madison put into the constitution as the price of getting virginia's ratification

is one sentence law it says the right of the people to be secure in their persons houses papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated and no warrants show issue but upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be see just now other words they can't spy on you on you personally unless they have enough proof to bring before a judge that you're up to something that's probably illegal in the case of the police helicopters the trucks the g.p.s. units the phone taps the infrared cameras to some extent both state governments congress and even the supreme court particular in the case of the infrared cameras have brought their use in to at least a marginal compliance with the fourth amendment not so with drones at least not

yet. and that's one of the reasons why the city or charlottesville virginia a stone's throw from thomas jefferson's home you can see it standing there in monaco did a beautiful thing this week in passing a resolution calling for a ban for the moment on information derived from drones in their skies the rutherford institute proposed the first draft of what ultimately became the resolution that was promoted by the charlottesville center for peace and justice that included language that said whereas the federal government in the commonwealth of virginia thus far failed to provide reasonable legal restrictions on the use of drones within the united states and where police departments throughout the country have begun implementing drone technology absent any guidance or guidelines from lawmakers there should be a two year moratorium on using information obtained from them or on weaponize it though that last part after the ellipse of says my summary of paragraph of legal

ease as david swanson notes in his blog on the c.c.p. j. website without proper safeguards these drones some of which are deceptively small and capable of videotaping the facial expressions of people on the ground from hundreds of feet near well i'm sure in a new age of surveillance in american society that even those indoors in the privacy of their own homes will be safe from these aerial spies which can be equipped with technology capable of appearing through walls and that doesn't even include the capability of those drones police drones to be a weapon equipped from bullets to nerve gas or their ability to be hacked or their data streams to be hijacked by malicious corporations or weird stalkers or foreign governments. you know nobody is saying there is or maybe there's a few but pretty much nobody is saying there's no legitimate place for drones and

police work in america there are a lot cheaper than the helicopter for example that famously followed o.j. simpson's car at the most basic level they're really just an extension of already existing in an already used technology and yet as with any technology think email for example or text messaging we need to make sure that it's used in a way that complies with the fourth amendment that respects our individual rights to privacy. and that's why it's way beyond time for us all to have a national conversation about drones over u.s. skies or the help of the c c p j charlottesville has taken a great first step in starting that actual dialogue oregon for example started a similar debate with legislation introduced by both a democrat and a republican concerned about individual privacy rights so let's all work for solid

legislative restrictions on police use of these drones so that they help legitimate police work while respecting the fourth amendment privacy rights of us. and that's the way it is tonight tuesday february fifth two thousand and thirteen for more information check out our websites of thom hartmann dot com free speech dot org are to dot com and hulu dot com slash the big picture and don't forget democracy is not a spectator sport participate bodi need enough it begins when you get out there get active occupy something tag or see the. oh oh.

government no longer represents the. people who are going to take the term. least in the traditional. the way our economic system currently is not.

download the official application yourself choose your language stream quality and enjoy your favorite. if you're away from your television just doesn't fly with your mobile devices you can watch on t.v. any time anyway.